Supreme Court seeks Centre's response on removal of Vaid as DGP
New Delhi, Sep 11 : The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the Centre's response on a plea contending that the removal of S.P. Vaid as Director General of Jammu and Kashmir Police breached the top court's directions on police reforms and amounted to "gross contempt".
Seeking the response, a bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud sought the assistance of Attorney General K.K. Venugopal in the matter.
The court directed that a copy of the application be served on lawyer Binu Tamta, who is assisting the Attorney General and to senior counsel Raju Ramachandran who is amicus curiae in the case.
Vaid was removed on the midnight of September 6.
Venugopal told the court that the court has barred the appointment of acting Director General of Police (DGP) to curb the misuse of fixed two-year term for the head of police force in States and Union Territories.
Counsel Prashant Bhushan, appearing for former DGP of Uttar Pradesh Prakash Singh, told the bench that removal of Vaid was in violation of the Supreme Court directions.
He questioned the appointment of Vaid's successor Dilbagh Singh on the grounds that he had been charge-sheeted in a recruitment scam.
Advocate Shoeb Alam, who appeared for Jammu and Kashmir, told the court that the appointment of Vaid's successor was a temporary arrangement and the State has approached the UPSC with a panel of names to be named the regular DGP.
The 2006 court directions on police reforms came on a petition by Prakash Singh.
Bhushan told the court that Vaid was removed although there were no charges against him and without consulting the State Security Commission.
The court directed the matter to be listed for hearing next week.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Notices seeking CEC's removal refer to Rahul's dissent note, incidents of voter-list manipulation
New Delhi (PTI): Notices seeking a motion for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar flag issues ranging from the appointment process to his public attack on Rahul Gandhi and instances of alleged manipulation of votes in recent elections, an opposition leader said on Monday.
The notices, submitted in both Houses of Parliament on Friday, seek a motion for Kumar's removal from the CEC's post, as opposition MPs have cried foul over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls and raised concerns over the alleged manipulation of voters' lists on multiple occasions.
The process to remove the CEC is similar to that for the removal of a Supreme Court or high court judge, meaning an impeachment can be effected only on the ground of "proven misbehaviour or incapacity".
According to the opposition leader, the around-10-page-long notices refer to a dissent note submitted by Gandhi in February 2025, when Kumar was picked for the post. Gandhi, the leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha, is a member of the panel that appoints the CEC, along with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah.
ALSO READ: Over 13,000 teaching posts vacant in KVs, Navodaya schools: Education ministry
In his dissent note, the LoP had said, "It is both disrespectful and discourteous for the PM and HM to have made a midnight decision to select the new CEC, when the very composition of the committee and the process is being challenged in the Supreme Court and is due to be heard in less than forty-eight hours."
The notices also mention the CEC's public ultimatum to Gandhi from a press conference in August 2025. Amid allegations of "vote theft" by the opposition, a combative Kumar had asked the LoP to either apologise or back his claims with a signed affidavit, as required under electoral rules.
The notices also refer to allegations of manipulations in the voters' list raised by opposition parties in Karnataka's Aland and Mahadevapura.
The notices have been signed by around 130 members in the Lok Sabha and 60 in the Rajya Sabha. The signatories include leaders of the INDIA bloc parties, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and some independent MPs.
According to sources, the notices list seven charges against Kumar, including "partisan and discriminatory conduct in office", "deliberate obstruction of investigation of electoral fraud" and "mass disenfranchisement".
The opposition parties have accused the CEC of aiding the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on several occasions, especially with the SIR exercise, which they have alleged aims at helping the ruling party at the Centre.
If the motion is admitted in both Houses, a committee will be constituted jointly by the Lok Sabha speaker and the Rajya Sabha chairman.
The committee will consist of the chief justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a "distinguished jurist".
The proceedings of the committee are like any court proceedings where witnesses and the accused are cross-examined.
The CEC, too, will get a chance to speak before the panel.
According to rules, once the committee submits its report, it will be tabled in the House and discussions will commence for impeachment.
A motion to remove a judge or, in this case, the CEC, will have to be passed by both Houses.
When the House discusses the motion, Kumar will have the right to defend himself standing at the entrance of the House chamber.
